| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
SnapNames Response to Names Council Wait Listing Service Report
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 20 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
All of Susan's arguments have been made in the past, and had been responded to. It seems that they simply want to get in "the last word" (or "the last spin"), as a desperate last move to influence the ICANN board.
The fact of the matter is that there is intrinsic demand for the domain names themselves, not WLS as a mechanism to acquire them. We currently have numerous means to acquire those names, and WLS seeks to monopolize that marketplace not because it is a "better offering", but instead because it gets first dibs on all the names, leaving everyone else with names that no one else wanted. If NameWinner had done such a deal with Verisign, instead of SnapNames, we'd see the exact opposite spin by SnapNames, I'm sure, that it's anti-competitive, etc.
I found it amusing that proponents of WLS refused to take my "Cookie Challenge", posted on the DNSO GA list multiple times, to answer the questions posed at:
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc10/msg02855.html
among other places. However, Susan has taken up the "Cheese Challenge". Where shall I send the cheese, to go along with her whine? :)
Sincerely,
George Kirikos
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
I just love this part of the response...
"its duty (ICANN) is to approve any new service that the registry judges will improve the consumer experience"
Someone please explain to me how having to pay an inflated $70.00 WLS price for a deleted domain name instead of the $8.95 I pay for it now, will "improve my consumer experience"
Crikey Mate!
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
If ICANN can ever get off its ass and implement the Redemption Grace Period (they've only had 8+ months so far) this all becomes academic. They haven't managed for that very reason. Ask each Board member to come clean on how much they have invested in VeriSign. Like the saying goes follow the money. -g
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
This all started with VeriSign complaining about a problem with equal access to the registry which has supposedly been fixed for some time now.
Really, just how hard can it possibly be to search for all expired domain names in their database, flag and delete them for crying out loud.
Its mind boggling that they have some people actually believing that its going to take some sophisticated solution, i.e. SnapNames to solve all of this.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their
respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com
|
